Quote:

---

You fail to recognize that its your side pulling against the recovery that slows the progress,

---

What I recognize is that just like in the 1930s ;government intervention extended the depression.

Quote:

---

And maybe its your intention Tom, to point out the job losses by the auto industry, without acknowledging what would have been no auto industry and millions of job losses,

---

Ford did not become a ward of the government . How is it that they were able to restructure without Uncle Obama taking them over ?

Quote:

---

Capitalism is ending and change will be painfull, there is no panocea, no great recovery

---

No sir ;what is proving to be a failure is the paternalistic Bismark state socialist model .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

No sir ;what is proving to be a failure is the paternalistic Bismark state socialist model .

---

Tom, where on earth do you get these ideas? Everything that doesn't conform to the free market model is not necessarily socialism. Bismarck was anti-socialist. If anything he was a pragmatist.

Tut

Again Tom you don't have all the facts,

Government Bailout of Ford GM Chrysler and the Auto Industry

Quote:

---

Ford requested a $9 billion line-of-credit from the government, and a $5 billion loan from the Energy Department. Ford pledged to accelerate development of both hybrid and battery-powered vehicles, retool plants to increase production of smaller cars, close dealerships, and sell Volvo. Ford is in better shape than GM or Chrysler because it had already mortgaged its assets in 2006 to raise $24.5 billion. Although Ford didn't need, and didn't receive any funds, it also didn't want its competition to get the upper hand thanks to the government bailout.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TUT317

Tom, where on earth do you get these ideas? Everything that doesn't conform to the free market model is not necessarily socialism. Bismarck was anti-socialist. If anything he was a pragmatist.

Tut

---

I clearly called his model state socialist.. and it was . It really doesn't matter that he was in fact a monarcist . He instituted his reforms to appease the working class and detract support for the radical socialists. So although he opposed socialism ,his reforms were indeed socialist. By implementing the minimalist view of the socialists he undercut their support . However ;it fed very well into gradualists strategy like the Fabians.
The ball still moves "FORWARD" (note that is the new Obama campaign word ) .It has been the Progressive game plan for a century .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I clearly called his model state socialist ..and it was . It really doesn't matter that he was in fact a monarcist . He instituted his reforms to appease the working class and detract support for the radical socialists. So although he opposed socialism ,his reforms were indeed socialist. By implementing the minimalist view of the socialists he undercut their support . However ;it fed very well into gradualists strategy like the Fabians.
The ball still moves "FORWARD" (note that is the new Obama campaign word ) .It has been the Progressive game plan for a century .

---

I see, so 100 years of world political history can be summed up by the principle of bivalence (one or the other). One hundred years of economic history leading up to the present day also boils down to Socialism or free market economics. True or not true?

So is it the invisible hand of socialism that is simplifying world events and guiding us towards a socialist end?

Just because someone introduces socialist reforms doesn't necessarily make them a socialist, nor does it make him a conformist of socialist model.

My readings of Bismarck tells me that he was a pragmatist who implemented socialist reforms. After all that is what pragmatists tend to do. But we can ignore pragmatism?


Tut

Always Forward right ? The assumption is that these reforms are good . I do not agree. That 100 years of history has led the world to the brink of collapse . What difference to the socialist if the reforms are radically produced overnight ;or gradually over many decades ?The Marx vision of the end of history is the same... mission accomplished .

"Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me." (Bismarck)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

always Forward right ? The assumption is that these reforms are good . I do not agree. That 100 years of history has led the world to the brink of collapse . What difference to the socialist if the reforms are radically produced overnight ;or gradually over many decades ?The Marx vision of the end of history is the same....mission accomplished .

"Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me." (Bismarck)

---

Hi Tom,

Always forward?

We have no choice. In physics the arrow of time points in one direction. It is the same for politics, economics and anything else. We can't go back to the past to save the future. There is no society that has ever achieved this and none ever will. You don't think I long for this possibility? You don't think Plato longed for this possibility?

Like you I don't agree that all reforms are good, but we can only move forward. By holding up an ideal model of economics, society, politics we end up being an ideologue. It is easy to be safe in the knowledge that what is happening in the world doesn't really conform to the ideal and that everything will eventually be realized once it does.

You don't need me to tell you we live in an imperfect world with imperfect systems in. Idealizing a system won't provide the answer.


Tut

P.S.

In relation to your Bismarck quote. The idea of pragmaticism is that it doesn't conform to a model .

Quote:

---

Like you I don't agree that all reforms are good, but we can only move forward. By holding up an ideal model of economics, society, politics we end up being an ideologue. It is easy to be safe in the knowledge that what is happening in the world doesn't really conform to the ideal and that everything will eventually be realized once it does.

You don't need me to tell you we live in an imperfect world with imperfect systems in. By idealizing a system won't provide the answer.

---

I'm rejecting the utopian vision of those who move society ever FORWARD . I am not the one idealizing. I'm the one who is warning that as we centralize and consolidate power in the hands of the Leviathan we lose too much ;and that it is a system doomed to failure .

Quote:

---

We can't go back to the past to save the future.

---

Why not ? I think in many cases that is exactly what's needed . I happen to think that any law created should have an expiration date where it should be reviewed and only reinstituted if periodically debated and again approved . How about showing some positive results ? Does a program work ? Shouldn't we know it works before it becomes permanently institutionalized?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Sorry if you think I insulted you intelligence, not my intentions. But please look a bit deeper than Fox News for all the facts. In today's age, there is no excuse not to know what they don't tell you. So don't insult mine with a lack of facts.

---

Nice, an apology followed by another attempt at an insult, lol. You want facts? I've always got facts but I don't think you're interested in facts, I think you're only interested in ideological rhetoric.

So far in this thread I've sourced Wikipedia and Business Insider.

So far this week I've also sourced ABC/Yahoo, Investors Business Daily (via Hotair), The Wall Street Journal (Twice), WaPo and White House Dossier, Newsweek and Pulitzer.

You want more facts? Obama's Green Jobs plan is a monumental FAILURE (IBD). How long will our kids be paying for that boondoggle? Unemployment has been over 8 percent now for over 3 years (BLS) in spite of Obama's nearly trillion dollar stimulus, and you guys think the answer is to double down on the stimulus. How long is it going to take our kids and grandkids to pay for repeating that failure? The cost of Obamacare keeps rising (Washington Examiner), how are we going to pay for it, by raising taxes on the 1 percent? Even Bill Clinton said you could tax him at 100 percent and it wouldn't be enough (Politico) to balance the budget.

Doubling down on the same mistakes is not moving "forward" and spewing clichés does nothing to solve real life problems, yet that is all the left is offering as a solution.

Quote:

---

Did you know that stopping the filibuster in the Senate would result in 1.5 million new jobs? Bet you don't, nor do you care.

---

Your source is who, Think Progress? Huffpo? Daily Kos? When Democrats block change it's "patriotism." When Republicans do it it's "obstruction." Cry me a river.

P.S. Please drop the Fox News bit, I think I've sufficiently destroyed that line of attack.

Quote:

---

Ford requested a $9 billion line-of-credit from the government, and a $5 billion loan from the Energy Department. Ford pledged to accelerate development of both hybrid and battery-powered vehicles, retool plants to increase production of smaller cars, close dealerships, and sell Volvo. Ford is in better shape than GM or Chrysler because it had already mortgaged its assets in 2006 to raise $24.5 billion. Although Ford didn't need, and didn't receive any funds, it also didn't want its competition to get the upper hand thanks to the government bailout.

---

Yeah that's right Ford had government" funding" in the form of a line of credit to insure that the government run auto company did not gain a competitive advantage.

Today the US taxpayer owns about 26% of GM To break even ;shares of GM would need to sell at $53/share... Today GM shares are about $22/share ;and investors are bailing out.
Why Investors Are Selling GM Like Crazy - Seeking Alpha
The whole company is worth less than $34 billion even after we invested $50 billion in direct TARP funds alone plus other gimmicks that far exceed those loan guarantees to Ford(a special exemption waiving payment of $45.4 billion in taxes on future profits, an exemption for all product liability on cars sold before the bailout, $360 million in stimulus funds, $7,500 tax credit for those who buy the Chevy Volt. )

So yeah let the President brag about his success story. We would've been better off letting them go through standard bankruptcy .

Mitt would love that, because he would have taken millions out as profit, along with pensions too. I get you don't like it, but as long as they sell cars, and add JOBS, there is always tomorrow. Right?

http://seekingalpha.com/article/5877...-gm-like-crazy

Quote:

---

GM showed a major increase in revenue in North American markets even though it lost market share to foreign automakers along with Ford as well. The problem is that GM's heavy investment in the European market has been dragging down revenues since before GM went into bankruptcy. The issue here is that this trend still continues. There seems to be no way out or no plan in sight aside from waiting for the European market to rebound.

---

Its not all gloom and doom Tom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Its not all gloom and doom Tom.

---

Wait, isn't that what you've been warning of if Mitt gets elected?

I am pretty sure that the numbers add up to $400,000 per job saved (and that may be a low ball estimate )... we are also subsidizing every GM car sold to the tune of almost $2,000 /car...

and this doesn't account for the former GMAC aka Ally Financial bailout which never gets mentioned in the equation .We still own 74% of the company, and no one knows the value of the potential loss or since the government has not sold any of this company's stock into the market place.

Quote:

---

As of January, 2012, TARP had about $12 billion invested in Ally . The government stake represented a 74% ownership interest in Ally. In March, 2012, Ally failed the Federal Reserve's so-called financial "stress test" for capital adequac

---

Ally Financial - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

always Forward right ? The assumption is that these reforms are good . I do not agree. That 100 years of history has led the world to the brink of collapse . What difference to the socialist if the reforms are radically produced overnight ;or gradually over many decades ?The Marx vision of the end of history is the same....mission accomplished .

"Call it socialism or whatever you like. It is the same to me." (Bismarck)

---

Tripe, Tom, otherwise known a capitalist propaganda .What has led the world to this collapse is unbridled capitalism. You want to look a Greece and say AH! I told you so. But the destabilastion occurred in The United States in the sub prime loans bubble perpertrated, wait for it, by capitalist bankers who subverted the world with their dud securities. Good Heavens even my local Local Government Council lost millions and that is about as far away from Wall street as you can get. It wasn't socialism, it was greed, deliberate fraud, and it is a virus which is allowed to grow and flourish in very few places.

I've explained that before. It was government trying manage and control of the housing market that caused the 2008 crisis.

What is happenening in Greece ;and Spain and Italy is the direct result of cradle to grave entitlement culture. And this oaf Hollande will drive France over the cliff. The EU stands a good chance of collapse before the US November elections.

Repeat after me... Free Market Capitalism is the best path to Prosperity

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Mitt would love that, because he would have taken millions out as profit, along with pensions too. I get you don't like it, but as long as they sell cars, and add JOBS, there is always tomorrow. Right?

Why Investors Are Selling GM Like Crazy - Seeking Alpha


Its not all gloom and doom Tom.

---

All of you seem to know more about all this than I do, so I have a question on a personal business level. I purchased a truck from Chrysler Financial and half way through paying on the loan, supposedly Chrysler went bankrupt after or was it before, receiving a bailout. In any event, about this time I received notification that my loan was being sold to TD Auto Finance out of Canada and that I was to start paying them directly. So there I was paying a foreign country (as much as I love Canada) for an American loan…of which Toronto-Dominion Bank acquired Chrysler Financial for $6.3 billion. Question: Was Chrysler Financial obligated to pay back the American Government any of the $6.3 billion they received from a Canadian bank for the bailout amount that went south, that the American taxpayers' essential paid for? Wasn't this under Obama's watch?

Quote:

---

In December 2010, Toronto-Dominion Bank announced it would acquire Chrysler Financial for $6.3 billion from private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management. The company was renamed TD Auto Finance in early June 2011.

---

TD Auto Finance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD_Auto_Finance

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Repeat after me .....Free Market Capitalism is the best path to Prosperity

---

Sorry Tom I'm not into repeating capitalist mantras anymore than I am into repeating communist mantras but I did like and you should repeat this one yourself we will sell the last capitalist the rope to hang himself It has a real possibility of coming true and only because of the actions of the capitalists themselves who have employed communist labour

Markets need to be regulated the great bubbles of the past few centuries have been unregulated markets. Get it Tom Adam Smith and Milton Keynes were wrong, they saw through a glass but dimly and stop making the excuse that the government caused the GFC. Greed and fraud caused the GFC Tom. And it is ever so so long as unregulated markets exist

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FirstChair

All of you seem to know more about all this than I do, so I have a question on a personal business level. I purchased a truck from Chrysler Financial and half way through paying on the loan, supposedly Chrysler went bankrupt after or was it before, receiving a bailout. In any event, about this time I received notification that my loan was being sold to TD Auto Finance out of Canada and that I was to start paying them directly. So there I was paying a foreign country (as much as I love Canada) for an American loan…of which Toronto-Dominion Bank acquired Chrysler Financial for $6.3 billion. Question: Was Chrysler Financial obligated to pay back the American Government any of the $6.3 billion they received from a Canadian bank for the bailout amount that went south, that the American taxpayers’ essential paid for? Wasn't this was under Obama's watch?

TD Auto Finance:
TD Auto Finance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---

By your theorum FC there should be no cross border finance. Chrysler was required to do whatever its agreement required. They didn't receive a bailout from a canadian bank. The bank bought the asset and you should be pleased they did since a bankruptcy makes many things complicated. You cannot blame BO for a commercial transaction and you should blame corporate greed and fraud for the losses not BO

.Free Market Capitalism is the best path to Prosperity

Quote:

---

we will sell the last capitalist the rope to hang himself

---

You keep on touting your economic turn around without mentioning that it is based on selling resources to the Potamkin economy of your neighbor . Your model needs the Chinese to continue to grow beyond reason . I think you are in for a whole lot of hurt . But go ahead ;listen to Red Julia's lies about surplus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I am pretty sure that the numbers add up to $400,000 per job saved (and that may be a low ball estimate ) ..... we are also subsidizing every GM car sold to the tune of almost $2,000 /car...

---

Some Chevy volts are being subsidized to the tune of over $30,000 when you take in the $25,600 federal grant and the $7000 per Volt subsidy. And those "green jobs" have cost the taxpayer something like $2 million each. Give me $2 million to play with and I guarantee I can create a lot more than one job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FirstChair

All of you seem to know more about all this than I do, so I have a question on a personal business level. I purchased a truck from Chrysler Financial and half way through paying on the loan, supposedly Chrysler went bankrupt after or was it before, receiving a bailout. In any event, about this time I received notification that my loan was being sold to TD Auto Finance out of Canada and that I was to start paying them directly. So there I was paying a foreign country (as much as I love Canada) for an American loan…of which Toronto-Dominion Bank acquired Chrysler Financial for $6.3 billion. Question: Was Chrysler Financial obligated to pay back the American Government any of the $6.3 billion they received from a Canadian bank for the bailout amount that went south, that the American taxpayers’ essential paid for? Wasn't this under Obama's watch?



TD Auto Finance:
TD Auto Finance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---

The Chrysler bailout was more complicated because it involved getting a foreign auto maker (FIAT ) to take over Chrysler . Not sure how their financial division was handled ;but best guess from your reply is that it also involved a foreign banking institution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Repeat after me .....Free Market Capitalism is the best path to Prosperity

---

True. Provided you are not poor, socially disadvantaged, elderly or unborn.

Tut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TUT317

True. Provided you are not poor, socially disadvantaged, elderly or unborn.

Tut

---

I don't buy that for a minute.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I don't buy that for a minute.

---

The whole lot or just one particular bit?

The unborn is voiceless . So it is particularly cruel that the government has abrogated it's responsibility to protect the child.
The elderly that have taken advantage of free market capitalism are doing OK
The best path for the poor to improve their lot is through the free market ;especially when one contrasts their prospects against ones who become permanent wards of the state .

The term "socially disadvantaged " is too broad a term to comment on.

Hello:

Free market capitalism IS the best way to prosperity. But, we don't HAVE that. We have CRONY capitalism. That helps the politically CONNECTED - not good managers.

As long as a company or an industry can get congress to make special rules for them, they don't have to COMPETE any more... They can just sit there and rake in the money.

You can tell WHICH companies they are... When you call 'em, you wind up in voice mail jail.. That's ON PURPOSE. They don't NEED to satisfy YOU any longer.. They only need to satisfy their congressmen.

excon

Save it Tut, all anyone has to do is take a bath, and get a job. There are plenty of dish washing jobs around. How long have they, the right, been calling poor, socially disadvantaged, elderly lazy drains on society, that should be forced to pay their fair share, while protecting those who have extracted all the wealth.

When will you listen to them and start making them pay for their own crumbs? That's the free market, if there are no bootstraps, then pull yourself up by your socks, and its your fault you have no socks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

The unborn is voiceless . So it is particularily cruel that the government has abrogated it's responsibility to protect the child.
The elderly that have taken advantage of free market capitalism are doing ok
The best path for the poor to improve their lot is through the free market ;especially when one contrasts their prospects against ones who become permanent wards of the state .

The term "socially disadvantaged " is too broad a term to comment on.

---

Hi Tom,

No, SCOTUS abrogated its responsibility by not implementing legislation from the bench.

The elderly are doing Ok? Ok, is not too broad a term?

Yes, I guess the poor have no market value.

Tut

Quote:

---

Yes, I guess the poor have no market value.

---

Too many examples of the poor lifting themselves up and improving their lot to take that comment seriously . Generation after generation of Americans came here poor ;and they or their families did not remain so. This happens today and it happened years before the government decided that they would not survive without government intervention. I don't know enough about your country to make that claim ;but it is absolutely true here.

Yes we do have many examples of people who overcome their obstacles, and even more of people who have made a life and go un noticed and even more of people who end up in jail. While its great to be positive, and proactive, you still have to acknowledge the great majority who stay positive and proactive, and never get rich. So why penalize them, and demonize them, or even blame them when they need a helping hand every now and then?

And what's the value of making more poor people by cutting off the circulation of MONEY, while blaming the guy who came into this mess that the free market created?

The free market, and job creators are but lies to justify robbery, and bad GREEDY behavior. So when are the jo creators and free markets going to take responsibility, and clean up their own mess, or even apreciate the ones that saved their arses from oblivion?

Or it at least, be made to pay for their crimes!?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Save it Tut, all anyone has to do is take a bath, and get a job. There are plenty of dish washing jobs around. How long have they, the right, been calling poor, socially disadvantaged, elderly lazy drains on society, that should be forced to pay their fair share, while protecting those who have extracted all the wealth.

---

I've never said that.

Quote:

---

When will you listen to them and start making them pay for their own crumbs? That's the free market, if there are no bootstraps, then pull yourself up by your socks, and its your fault you have no socks.

---

Come on Tal, repeating the lie is not going to make it true. You might get someone to believe it but it's still a lie, just like the ridiculous "war on women" meme. I've already told you that like millions of other Americans I put my money where my mouth is. And when I say MY MONEY, I mean MY MONEY, voluntarily and out of true love and concern. Unlike Obama who when he says "I am my brother's keeper" he means "I'm going to take your money against your will and waste it through inefficient bureaucracies while your brother goes without."

Just as the free market is the best path to prosperity, private benevolence is the most efficient way to help those in need. When the feds become as efficient as World Vision in helping those in need I'll listen to you. Meanwhile, I'll continue to get the most effective use of my contributions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TUT317

The whole lot or just one particular bit?

---

The whole lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

I've never said that.



Come on Tal, repeating the lie is not going to make it true. You might get someone to believe it but it's still a lie, just like the ridiculous "war on women" meme. I've already told you that like millions of other Americans I put my money where my mouth is. And when I say MY MONEY, I mean MY MONEY, voluntarily and out of true love and concern. Unlike Obama who when he says "I am my brother's keeper" he means "I'm going to take your money against your will and waste it through inefficient bureaucracies while your brother goes without."

Just as the free market is the best path to prosperity, private benevolence is the most efficient way to help those in need. When the feds become as efficient as World Vision in helping those in need I'll listen to you. Meanwhile, I'll continue to get the most effective use of my contributions.

---

You know I don't repeat lies, I state facts and can prove them in the real world, by reading many newspapers, from many cities, and cross checking references and reading published reports and see real people and what they confront. So stop taking it personally when I make statements of facts.

Refute my facts with yours before you call me a liar. My mind is open to them, but I will check and verify. I expect you to also.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello:

Free market capitalism IS the best way to prosperity. But, we don't HAVE that. We have CRONY capitalism. That helps the politically CONNECTED - not good managers.

As long as a company or an industry can get congress to make special rules for them, they don't have to COMPETE any more... They can just sit there and rake in the money.

You can tell WHICH companies they are... When you call 'em, you wind up in voice mail jail.. That's ON PURPOSE. They don't NEED to satisfy YOU any longer.. They only need to satisfy their congressmen.

excon

---

Then I suppose we can expect... more bad days are coming.

"Then I suppose we can expect...more bad days are coming."


No just more work to do!! Bad days as well as good ones come and go all the time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

"Then I suppose we can expect...more bad days are coming."


No just more work to do!!! Bad days as well as good ones come and go all the time.

---

Tushay!. A brief relapse of pessimism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

You know I don't repeat lies, I state facts and can prove them in the real world, by reading many newspapers, from many cities, and cross checking references and reading published reports and see real people and what they confront. So stop taking it personally when I make statements of facts.

Refute my facts with yours before you call me a liar. My mind is open to them, but I will check and verify. I expect you to also.

---

Show me the facts brother, all you showed me was rhetoric - the insinuation (better?) that free market conservatives don't give a rat's a$$ about helping people in need and saying it's their own fault "you have no socks." Totally untrue, and I'll be eagerly awaiting your facts proving otherwise.

Never thought you would ask. I will start with the Ryan budget, passed TWICE in the house, and touted by the current presidential candidate.

Fact-checking the Ryan budget plan - The Washington Post

Facts and figures: Best budget ever | The Economist

10 Myths of Ryan's House Budget Plan


These are but 3 of the sources that leads me to believe this plan is a hoax to hide robbery, and extraction. I have more data, but due to injury, I have to replace my 3rd baseman. Plus my daughter is bugging me for something or other, but I will return for YOUR facts and logic if you have some! And the prerequisite rhetoric if need be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

never thought you would ask. I will start with the Ryan budget, passed TWICE in the house, and touted by the current presidential candidate.

Fact-checking the Ryan budget plan - The Washington Post

Facts and figures: Best budget ever | The Economist

10 Myths of Ryan's House Budget Plan


These are but 3 of the sources that leads me to believe this plan is a hoax to hide robbery, and extraction. I have more data, but due to injury, I have to replace my 3rd baseman. Plus my daughter is bugging me for something or other, but I will return for YOUR facts and logic if you have some! And the prerequisite rhetoric if need be

---

Quite unsure how speculation on the Ryan budget implicates all free market conservatives as coldhearted, uncaring people or that Republicans want to do away with the government safety net. I know I've personally said it here until I've run out of breath that I believe in a government safety net. I just don't believe it should be expanded infinitely or that our private resources be diverted from maximum impact to government waste. If you can't see how bad government is at spending our money then you need new glasses.

I don't have an extra 3B but I have a spare SS, and I'm still killing you guys with only 4 outfielders.

Josh Hamilton can't stay that hot forever .